What single event contributed most to Germany's defeat in WW2?

[KG_Norad]

I am with Jag in that I would have liked to have seen the failure to take Moscow as a choice. Even if this was a choice with the way the Germans were treating the Russians, the way they were sending virtually all food and natural resources back to Germany, and with the historic annimosity between the two I don't think even Moscow would have mattered in the long run. Perhaps it would have only postponed the inevitable. Perhaps creating a harder time on the West front for the Allies.

So given the choices given on the poll I went with Kursk. Not that this battle was a catastrophic loss in and of itself but I think it went a long way in depleting what little strength the Germans had left. Had they pulled back in an orderly manner without wasting themselves on a fruitless battle perhaps they could have dug in to fight the russians tooth and nail closer to home.

I must say though very good comments one and all. Some excellent points!

[KG_AGCent]

I went with Stalingrad as it led not only to 90,000 captured but also in the neighborhood of 500,000 casualties. Manpower desperately needed to stem the red tide.

[KG_Soldier]

Well, since it's open for discussion, I might have something to say on the matter. I picked Stalingrad, but really, I think the decision to take the Caucasus and use Stalingrad as basically a blocking position for Army Group A instead of using their full force to block the Volga, thus crippling the Russians by forcing oil and such back through central Russia through like Uzbekistan (sp), doomed the Germans to eventual defeat. Hoth's 4th Panzer Army and the 6th Army were simply not enough to hold the Russians off or even completely take Stalingrad. If the main German goal had been to cut the Volga in '42 and then take the Caucasus in '43, it MIGHT have worked. Hitler's Fuhrer Directive No. 41, dated 5 April 1942 says it all:

"all available forces will be concentrated on the main operations in the Southern sector, with the aim of destroying the enemy before the Don, in order to secure the Caucasian oil fields and the passes through the Caucasian mountain themselves."
H.R. Trevor-Roper, "Hitlers War Directives," p. 117

This much smaller task than Barbarrossa proved even too much for the depleated German Army. Of course if Romania, Hungary, and Italy had had real armies, then....

[KG_Cloghaun]

Sorry I didn't list more choices. I picked the obvious ones that came to mind. The failure to take Moscow in 41' is one that should've been listed.

I went with Stalingrad. Blocking off the Volga (as Soldier suggested) then trying for Moscow the following year would've been a distinct possibility. Ofcourse, it suggests that the Germans would make the right choices in between. In a broader context I firmly believe the eastern front dictated the entire course of the war for Germany.

In any event, the poll is too abstract to be taken totally seriously. There are too many variables involved with any choice made, therefore I do not believe any of the choices are wrong answers. Had any of them had their outcomes reversed, it would've prolonged the war considerably. The German surrender at Tunisia for example. 150,000 seasoned German veterans. Over 100,000 Italians. Think of what use they could've been put to. The Germans could've been used to strengthen the westwall defenses, or used as reserves in the east, while the Italians could've slowed the pace on their own homeland. Numerous applications could've been applied.

Had Goering been successful at the Battle of Britian, your talking about being able to transfer over 60 divisions to the east.

Fun poll anyways. Glad to see people take an interest.

[Full Monty]

A couple of excellent books to read for those interested whether the Axis powers stood a chance of winning the war are:-

'Brute Force' by John Ellis
'Why the Allies Won' by Richard Overy

Both present well thought out arguments which you may or may not agree with - they don't agree with each other incidentally - but are essential reading for anyone interested in strategy in WW2.

[KG_Panzerschreck]

And here is another - "Disaster at D-Day" by Peter Tsouras. A very good book written in a context about how the Germans "won" D-Day. All based on historical units and "what if" scenarios, such as, what if Hitler released the Panzer Divisions when his Generals wanted him to, Ect... All firmly based in reality and things that easily could of happened, the author writes a gripping story on how the Germans turn the Allies back in France.